SoCS: interference

Late in the night, about an hour before the media blackout before the French election, a lot of the documents from the Macron campaign, mixed with some false documents, were dumped onto the internet. Four minutes before the blackout, the Macron campaign put out a statement, but the media is not allowed to distribute or discuss it.

It looks like this was caused by the same Russian-backed agency that interfered in the US election last year.

These attacks on democracy need to be recognized as cyber-warfare. No one other than the French people, full informed with facts, should be determining the outcome of their election. No one other than the United States people should be determining the outcome of the US election. We know that their was interference from Russia in our last election and we are dealing with the dire consequences.

NO foreign interference! NO “alternative facts”!
Linda’s prompt for Stream of Consciousness Saturday this week is  inter-. Join us! Find out how here:


Author: Joanne Corey

Please come visit my eclectic blog, Top of JC's Mind. You can never be sure what you'll find!

7 thoughts on “SoCS: interference”

    1. Better cybersecurity would help, but some of this stuff will still happen. I think that better education of voters would help, because a big part of the problem in the US is that many people can’t distinguish between important facts and policy points and spin/lies/exaggerations.

      Liked by 1 person

  1. The US interferes with the elections in other countries, and countries lie about who is doing what. A well-informed populous is important, and it is the duty of mainstream media and social media to provide a platform for ALL the candidates, not just the ones those entities favor. That has been the biggest problem.


    1. Every country’s government and citizens have a right to express opinion about their own and international affairs, but I don’t think it is right to steal documents or spread lies about candidates and news stories.

      I understand your point about media access, which was much more straightforward for the US when there were three major networks and rules about giving equal time to candidates. With so many different media outlets now, many not only promote the candidate of their choice but also actively denigrate any opponent. Coupled with a significant number of people who don’t believe there is such a thing as fact, it is a dangerous mix.


Any thoughts? Please share.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: